Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[WIP]: Resource warnings #167

Closed

Conversation

ndisner
Copy link
Collaborator

@ndisner ndisner commented Nov 18, 2020

Pull Request

Description

This PR is currently using python's any() function as a boolean to check if the resources in the simulation are found. I think this could be done better and any brainstorming is welcomed!

This pull request addresses #
Fixes #10

Checklist

The following items have been checked for this PR:

  • Conforms to PEP8 style standards (check with pylint, flake8, or similar)
  • Code is documented with docstrings, or docstrings have been updated as appropriate
  • New unit test/integration test have been added to check new code
  • All existing tests still pass

@arichar6 arichar6 marked this pull request as draft November 20, 2020 13:04
@arichar6
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for thinking about this. I suspect that more substantial changes will need to be made in order to get this to work correctly, though. The inspect_resource method gets called multiple times during setup, so there will be "missing" resources on many of those individual calls. I'd be happy to have a brainstorming session about this sometime. Maybe some of the interns would also like to be involved (@gracetangg, interested?). We should schedule something on Teams.

@gracetangg
Copy link

gracetangg commented Nov 20, 2020

@arichar6 Sounds good I'd be interested!

@arichar6
Copy link
Collaborator

I think this is no longer required, given the new sharing api in #170

@arichar6 arichar6 closed this Aug 25, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add a check to Simulation which confirms that all Modules/Diagnostics have the data they need
3 participants